Celtic Cup thread

[ArdeeBhoy]

I'm telling you that in many, many, instances you'll not "racially profile" (whatever race has got to do with the subject in hand????) going by a name.

It's simply crude.

It might be 'crude', but it's one way of differentiating between one group of people who see themselves as Irish and others who don't, to address your second 'point'.

As mentioned above, blame the parents!

And they could of course in reference to the Scotland game, have checked off these names....
;)

[BonnieShels]

I wouldn't expect a big jump in numbers now DI - many will be wise enough to see through the IFA spin and bull****.

Sponsors are not happy by all accounts, but that's not the bigger story I've heard from what I consider to be an informed source.

Here's a few questions for you to investigate/consider:

Did one of the participating FAs (not based on this island, and who were initially reluctant to take part) receive a "guarantee" of circa £2,000,000 to secure their participation?

Who underwrote that "guarantee"?

Is the competition going well re: revenues so far?

Why did the IFA ignore supporters representives' advices re: ticketing for the Scotland game ie. the IFA put tickets on open sale, against advice?

Are the IFA ****ting themselves with the prospect of a low turnout v the Republic and no turnout v Wales?

Why would that be?

Go on... :)

[Mr_Parker]

I wouldn't expect a big jump in numbers now DI - many will be wise enough to see through the IFA spin and bull****.

Sponsors are not happy by all accounts, but that's not the bigger story I've heard from what I consider to be an informed source.

Here's a few questions for you to investigate/consider:

Did one of the participating FAs (not based on this island, and who were initially reluctant to take part) receive a "guarantee" of circa £2,000,000 to secure their participation?

Who underwrote that "guarantee"?



A what was the motive in doing so? :waiting: :loser:

[awec]

Response from the AONISC to the IFA change of heart, on the BBC Sport Website:

"However in response, supporters spokesman Gary McAllister said that his organisation "are still encouraging fans not to travel to the upcoming matches".
"This is not simply about cost. It's about how the IFA handled the whole operation, and we don't have confidence working with the organisation for these games," added Mr McAllister.
The travel restrictions have been placed on the Northern Ireland supporters following minor incidents at the Nations Cup opener against Scotland at the Aviva Stadium in February.
McAllister told that BBC Sport that the Irish FA had ignored advice from the supporters group in advance of the February game."


We are still not going. The IFA burnt their bridges by trying to stick their arm in.

[DannyInvincible]

I wouldn't expect a big jump in numbers now DI - many will be wise enough to see through the IFA spin and bull****.

Sponsors are not happy by all accounts, but that's not the bigger story I've heard from what I consider to be an informed source.

Here's a few questions for you to investigate/consider:

Did one of the participating FAs (not based on this island, and who were initially reluctant to take part) receive a "guarantee" of circa £2,000,000 to secure their participation?

Who underwrote that "guarantee"?

Is the competition going well re: revenues so far?

Why did the IFA ignore supporters representives' advices re: ticketing for the Scotland game ie. the IFA put tickets on open sale, against advice?

Are the IFA ****ting themselves with the prospect of a low turnout v the Republic and no turnout v Wales?

Why would that be?

If I'm catching your drift, presumably the FAI aren't the sole party profiting from ticket sales then? If this was the case though, why were some NI fans urging an original boycott over lining the pockets of Delaney & Co. Poachers Ltd.?

[Not Brazil]

If I'm catching your drift, presumably the FAI aren't the sole party profiting from ticket sales then? If this was the case though, why were some NI fans urging an original boycott over lining the pockets of Delaney & Co. Poachers Ltd.?

Profiting?

Trying to minimise losses might be closer to the mark.

Regarding the boycott, those who urged such action on the "poaching" issue didn't have any momentum or impact - Over 6,000 Northern Ireland fans attended the game v Scotland. Similar numbers, if not more, were planning to attend the Republic game.

Perhaps they didn't stop to think about the financial side of things pertaining to the IFA? I don't know.

To be honest with you, I think some Northern Ireland supporters remain in total denial about the "eligibility issue".

[Not Brazil]

It might be 'crude', but it's one way of differentiating between one group of people who see themselves as Irish and others who don't, to address your second 'point'.


Not a very effective way...as you agree, it's crude.

Anyway - many of the guys I attend Northern Ireland games with, to watch the representative team of the Irish Football Association, certainly see themselves as Irish. It might not be your stereotype of "Irish", but Irish none the less.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Ah, there you go.
It does make you wonder why certain others not a million miles removed are so anti-Irish or happy to embrace foreign flags.....

So it's just their definition that's confused then.
;)

[Not Brazil]

Ah, there you go.
It does make you wonder why certain others not a million miles removed are so anti-Irish or happy to embrace foreign flags.....


What "foreign" flags on you blethering on about now?

[ArdeeBhoy]

Ha ha.

[Not Brazil]

Ha ha.

I was being serious - what are you on about?

[ifk101]

I was being serious - what are you on about?

ArdeeBhoy considers Irish and British as mutually exclusive.

[Not Brazil]

ArdeeBhoy considers Irish and British as mutually exclusive.

Oh, right.

I don't.

[Not Brazil]

Yesterday's U turn by the IFA - coach costs reduced to £22.00 - seems to have done the trick.

A grand total of 122 tickets sold via the IFA as of this morning.

[ArdeeBhoy]

I was being serious - what are you on about?

Kop on, you know exactly what.
If not, ask the dogs on the street....

[DeLorean]

Gary Speed complaining about the Celtic Cup Schedule (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/13373180.stm)

He's got a point, especially at the end of a "long hard season" as they say. Who came up with the fixtures anyway? I would have presumed they were decided between the nations involved.

Carling Nations Cup Remaining Fixtures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Nations_Cup#Republic_of_Ireland_v_Northern_Ir eland)

[DannyInvincible]

Profiting?

Trying to minimise losses might be closer to the mark.

Hehe, of course. I should have said "intending to profit".


To be honest with you, I think some Northern Ireland supporters remain in total denial about the "eligibility issue".

I have noticed that valid and relevant discussion on the subject is often dismissed as provocative or off-topic whenever an "alternative" view is offered on OWC. And the prevalence of seeming ignorance to the existence of article 15 along with steadfast belief in the territorial myth seems as strong as ever, even permeating the media. It does puzzle me when it's an issue that has been so widely publicised and when both FIFA's rule-book and the CAS ruling are so easily accessible and freely available to read online.


Yesterday's U turn by the IFA - coach costs reduced to £22.00 - seems to have done the trick.

A grand total of 122 tickets sold via the IFA as of this morning.

Is that about 22 up on yesterday? What a disaster. What will the IFA's next step be you reckon? What can they do really other than plead with fans? It's unlikely they could renegotiate the security arrangements with the Gardaí and stadium security. Would the AoNISC position differ if they pursued such a line of action or are they boycotting no matter what and without demands, if you will?

[The Fly]

Yesterday's U turn by the IFA - coach costs reduced to £22.00 - seems to have done the trick.

A grand total of 122 tickets sold via the IFA as of this morning.

Catch-22. ;)

Someone at the IFA has a sense of humour.

[awec]

Hehe, of course. I should have said "intending to profit".



I have noticed that valid and relevant discussion on the subject is often dismissed as provocative or off-topic whenever an "alternative" view is offered on OWC. And the prevalence of seeming ignorance to the existence of article 15 along with steadfast belief in the territorial myth seems as strong as ever, even permeating the media. It does puzzle me when it's an issue that has been so widely publicised and when both FIFA's rule-book and the CAS ruling are so easily accessible and freely available to read online.



Is that about 22 up on yesterday? What a disaster. What will the IFA's next step be you reckon? What can they do really other than plead with fans? It's unlikely they could renegotiate the security arrangements with the Gardaí and stadium security. Would the AoNISC position differ if they pursued such a line of action or are they boycotting no matter what and without demands, if you will?

I imagine a boycott will go ahead no matter what. I think the IFA ****ed people off with how they have handled this match. They had been advised by the Amalgamation for the Scotland game and totally ignored everything that was said. The boycott is mainly to do with the IFA's handling of the entire situation.

I don't see them lowering the price any further as that would just make them look like absolute fools (even more than they already look).

[Not Brazil]

What will the IFA's next step be you reckon?

To send someone down to Lidl to get in some extra supplies of toilet roll.:D

[DannyInvincible]

I see that the spin-doctors are currently in effect and a concerted campaign is now well underway on OWC to, rather disingenuously, pass the rationale behind this boycott off as having been motivated by the disagreement over player eligibility ex post facto and in spite of the original AoNISC announcement on the boycott mentioning nothing of it, citing solely the cost of travel, the security arrangements and the lack of willingness on the IFA's part to take NI fan's views into consideration as reasons.

I understand that there were initial hopes to stage a boycott over what some NI fans perceive to be a "sectarian policy of poaching" orchestrated by the FAI but that, and this was generally undisputed, only a very tiny minority supported these plans with around 8,000 still expected to attend the game. One relatively high-profile poster on OWC who was in favour of an original boycott even rebuked the notion of describing it as a "boycott" due to the fact that the numbers engaging were so few, feeling that such an exaggerated description might imply there was some sort of mass consensus or action; rather, he viewed it as no more than active opposition by a number of individuals acting independently, for want of a better description. Clearly, this latter and current boycott was spurred, not by something the FAI has done, but by the IFA's unsatisfactory arrangements with the supporters of its team.

Nevertheless, I fear that twisting the rationale behind the boycott after the fact to having had something to do with the player eligibility thing will, in most external observer's eyes, only serve to implicate the vast majority of (virtually all?) NI supporters with the divisive, insensitive and spiteful objection to certain Irish nationals having the right to represent their country in international football. Whilst it also comes across as a bit ignorant in light of the CAS ruling, I don't think it will do the fanbase any favours in nationalist circles.

[The Fly]

I see that the spin-doctors are currently in effect and a concerted campaign is now well underway on OWC to, rather disingenuously, pass the rationale behind this boycott off as having been motivated by the disagreement over player eligibility ex post facto and in spite of the original AoNISC announcement on the boycott mentioning nothing of it, citing solely the cost of travel, the security arrangements and the lack of willingness on the IFA's part to take NI fan's views into consideration as reasons.

I understand that there were initial hopes to stage a boycott over what some NI fans perceive to be a "sectarian policy of poaching" orchestrated by the FAI but that, and this was generally undisputed, only a very tiny minority supported these plans with around 8,000 still expected to attend the game. One relatively high-profile poster on OWC who was in favour of an original boycott even rebuked the notion of describing it as a "boycott" due to the fact that the numbers engaging were so few, feeling that such an exaggerated description might imply there was some sort of mass consensus or action; rather, he viewed it as no more than active opposition by a number of individuals acting independently, for want of a better description. Clearly, this latter and current boycott was spurred, not by something the FAI has done, but by the IFA's unsatisfactory arrangements with the supporters of its team.

Nevertheless, I fear that twisting the rationale behind the boycott after the fact to having had something to do with the player eligibility thing will, in most external observer's eyes, only serve to implicate the vast majority of (virtually all?) NI supporters with the divisive, insensitive and spiteful objection to certain Irish nationals having the right to represent their country in international football. Whilst it also comes across as a bit ignorant in light of the CAS ruling, I don't think it will do the fanbase any favours in nationalist circles.

I think you're 'lurking' now Danny.

[DannyInvincible]

Regarding the boycott, those who urged such action on the "poaching" issue didn't have any momentum or impact - Over 6,000 Northern Ireland fans attended the game v Scotland. Similar numbers, if not more, were planning to attend the Republic game.

Perhaps they didn't stop to think about the financial side of things pertaining to the IFA? I don't know.

I've come across an unsourced claim on OWC that the FAI were taking 80 per cent of the television revenue and 100 per cent of the revenue from ticket sales, with the remaining 20 per cent of television revenue presumably split between the other three competing associations. That would mean, however, that the IFA would have nothing to gain from trying to sell more tickets, at least financially anyway, and, thus, nothing to worry about with regard to minimising losses in this instance. Surely can't be right though, can it?

[DannyInvincible]

I think you're 'lurking' now Danny.

Haha, nothing wrong with that. :p

I was aware of the collapse of the original plans a while ago, mind. Just though it was an interesting twisting of events.

[Predator]

NI fans can vent their anger through boycotts and hot air, but it won't change much in the way of national team eligibility and nor should it. For every article or angry letter they send, we should systematically tear it to shreds with a thorough dose of common sense in our bellies.

This quote from Sickboy, administrator of OWC, had me laughing:
"Sometimes pushing poeple[sic] is the only way to get them going in the right direction."

Anyone detect an ever so faint hint of fascism in there?
The so-called 'right direction' is what, exactly, as decided by whom, exactly? You don't agree with what we have to say? You're wrong, you need to be 'pushed' into 'the right direction'.
It cries out to be parodied.

[DannyInvincible]

This quote from Sickboy, administrator of OWC, had me laughing:
"Sometimes pushing poeple[sic] is the only way to get them going in the right direction."

If Joseph Goebbels had been designated a marked burial place, I'd imagine that would have been the epitaph on his gravestone.

[gastric]

Let's come clean and stop the charade. We in the South secretly follow the Pope's orders and would like to see every new born Protestant child burn in hell except for the ones who want to play for us and who will now go to heaven. We refer offline to Northen Ireland as Nursery Ireland and CAS stands for Catholics Are Sectarians. I think by finally acknowledging what we really think we can stop the paranoia that exists up North. :rolleyes:

[Not Brazil]

I see that the spin-doctors are currently in effect and a concerted campaign is now well underway on OWC to, rather disingenuously, pass the rationale behind this boycott off as having been motivated by the disagreement over player eligibility ex post facto and in spite of the original AoNISC announcement on the boycott mentioning nothing of it, citing solely the cost of travel, the security arrangements and the lack of willingness on the IFA's part to take NI fan's views into consideration as reasons.


I understand that one of the justifications for the "campaign" is a poll on OWC which shows that 69.63% of those voting are boycotting because of the FAI "nicking" players.

On the same poll only 20.74% of those voting cited the travel restrictions etc as their reason for not attending.

However, on another forum poll on the same issue, the results are somewhat different.

It shows only 6.32% of those voting boycotting because of the FAI selecting Northern Ireland born players, with 69.63% citing the travel arrangements/restrictions as their reason for not attending.

[Sullivinho]

This quote from Sickboy, administrator of OWC, had me laughing:
"Sometimes pushing poeple[sic] is the only way to get them going in the right direction."

I feel like a traffic accident voyeur whenever I read the dispatches of your good self, DannyInvincible et al from that place.

[DannyInvincible]

I understand that one of the justifications for the "campaign" is a poll on OWC which shows that 69.63% of those voting are boycotting because of the FAI "nicking" players.

On the same poll only 20.74% of those voting cited the travel restrictions etc as their reason for not attending.

However, on another forum poll on the same issue, the results are somewhat different.

It shows only 6.32% of those voting boycotting because of the FAI selecting Northern Ireland born players, with 69.63% citing the travel arrangements/restrictions as their reason for not attending.

I am aware of the recent poll instigated on the 11th of May where the vast majority - now over 70 per cent - have voted citing the FAI "nicking" players as the reason for their boycott, but it's very easy to change one's apparent motivations after the fact and once one has already decided they'll not be going over the travel and security arrangements anyway, as the presumably-earlier poll you mention clearly demonstrates. I'm not aware of the other poll of which you speak but I assume it was before the "question" of "how [NI fans/OWC users] manage it" - that being how the boycott is depicted in the media with consideration also given to "some way of coat-tailing the current French scandal" - came into play on the morning of the 11th and began to receive much encouragement.

The most recent poll clearly offered most the chance to "save face" or "get it right the second time" and was well stage-managed as the seemingly trivial and fickle reasoning of a boycott over "paying an extra tenner and not getting a pint" came in for stark criticism from some even after the IFA reduced their travel price from £30 to £22: "I just dare someone to come on here and say that the £8 saving has swayed them and they're going again." On the other hand, taking a stand on the eligibility issue has been advanced as the principled stance.

It's patently obvious what sparked the boycott that actually took off.

[SkStu]

I am aware of the recent poll instigated on the 11th of May where the vast majority - now over 70 per cent - have voted citing the FAI "nicking" players as the reason for their boycott, but it's very easy to change one's apparent motivations after the fact and once one has already decided they'll not be going over the travel and security arrangements anyway, as the presumably-earlier poll you mention clearly demonstrates. I'm not aware of the other poll of which you speak but I assume it was before the "question" of "how [NI fans/OWC users] manage it" - that being how the boycott is depicted in the media with consideration also given to "some way of coat-tailing the current French scandal" - came into play on the morning of the 11th and began to receive much encouragement.

The most recent poll clearly offered most the chance to "save face" or "get it right the second time" and was well stage-managed as the seemingly trivial and fickle reasoning of a boycott over "paying an extra tenner and not getting a pint" came in for stark criticism from some even after the IFA reduced their travel price from £30 to £22: "I just dare someone to come on here and say that the £8 saving has swayed them and they're going again." On the other hand, taking a stand on the eligibility issue has been advanced as the principled stance.

It's patently obvious what sparked the boycott that actually took off.

i voted travel and security arrangements.

[geysir]

No space for the Lambeg drums on the bus.

[DannyInvincible]

i voted travel and security arrangements.

Hehe, do I detect a hint of dismissive sarcasm there? :p

The reason I'm highlighting this is because I do think it's a relevant and somewhat important issue when a disingenuous campaign is well underway, both nationally and internationally if those now taking a leading role in the boycott are to be believed, to win international support for the notion that the FAI are stealing players from another association; a notion that the vast majority of NI fans clearly didn't view as meriting a boycott in the first place.

[SkStu]

Hehe, do I detect a hint of dismissive sarcasm there? :p


no... i live in Canada and I have no house alarm...

(my jokes are clearly losing their punch!)

[Mr_Parker]

I wouldn't expect a big jump in numbers now DI - many will be wise enough to see through the IFA spin and bull****.

Sponsors are not happy by all accounts, but that's not the bigger story I've heard from what I consider to be an informed source.

Here's a few questions for you to investigate/consider:

Did one of the participating FAs (not based on this island, and who were initially reluctant to take part) receive a "guarantee" of circa £2,000,000 to secure their participation?

Who underwrote that "guarantee"?

Is the competition going well re: revenues so far?

Why did the IFA ignore supporters representives' advices re: ticketing for the Scotland game ie. the IFA put tickets on open sale, against advice?

Are the IFA ****ting themselves with the prospect of a low turnout v the Republic and no turnout v Wales?

Why would that be?

IFA confirm £2million more to Scotland than the rest in todays Sunday World. Scotland seem to be trying to deflect the story.

Question, as you rightly point out, that is not answered, is who is underwriting it?

[Mr_Parker]

http://i805.photobucket.com/albums/yy337/Mr_Parker2009/scan0091.jpg

[DannyInvincible]

The Scottish statement doesn't necessarily deny that the SFA are receiving £2 million for partaking; just that they aren't receiving £2 million more than the others. Presumably the FAW and IFA are also receiving some participation fee each meaning it would technically be correct, although their amounts probably pale in comparison.

[Charlie Darwin]

It looks like it could be a semantics thing. They may have been guaranteed £2 million more than the others have been guaranteed, but obviously that doesn't mean they'll get £2 million more at the end of the day.

[TiocfaidhArmani]

I understand that one of the justifications for the "campaign" is a poll on OWC which shows that 69.63% of those voting are boycotting because of the FAI "nicking" players.

I don't care what the reasons are, this is one boycott I fully support. Your scum fans are welcome not to come, you're not welcome after the last time and how you behaved. The citizens who live close to the Aviva will be dancing in the streets.

[Not Brazil]

IFA confirm £2million more to Scotland than the rest in todays Sunday World. Scotland seem to be trying to deflect the story.

Question, as you rightly point out, that is not answered, is who is underwriting it?

I note that Patrick Nelson is quick to distance himself from the "agreement".

Perhaps it was a desperate act by a desperate man trying to cling on to power?

[Not Brazil]

The most recent poll clearly offered most the chance to "save face" or "get it right the second time" and was well stage-managed as the seemingly trivial and fickle reasoning of a boycott over "paying an extra tenner and not getting a pint" came in for stark criticism from some even after the IFA reduced their travel price from £30 to £22: "I just dare someone to come on here and say that the £8 saving has swayed them and they're going again." On the other hand, taking a stand on the eligibility issue has been advanced as the principled stance.

It's patently obvious what sparked the boycott that actually took off.

It is, indeed, patently obvious.

Before the travel/ticketing arrangements were announced by the IFA, upwards of 6,000 fans intending to travel.

After the travel/ticketing arrangements were announced by the IFA, it all kicked off.

As mentioned previously, before the Scotland game, Northern Ireland fans' representatives advised the IFA of concerns surrounding the distribution of tickets - this advise was ignored.

The IFA pleading for supporters groups to work with them on this one, was never going to have legs, after the arrangements were announced.

An article in the Sunday Life confirmed the stance of the AONISC yesterday (not online yet).

Things are extremely frosty between the AONISC and the IFA at present.

It would appear that those propogating that the boycott was because of player "nicking" haven't managed to get their message across to the media yet.

[Mr_Parker]

I note that Patrick Nelson is quick to distance himself from the "agreement".

Perhaps it was a desperate act by a desperate man trying to cling on to power?
Surely not.........no it couldn't be....well we are, where we are.....

[ifk101]

So the long and the short of it is the IFA is going to take a severe financial hit? What about the FAI?

[Not Brazil]

Is that about 22 up on yesterday? What a disaster.

There must have been a couple of refunds.

120 tickets sold, as of this morning.

30 sold for our game v Wales.

[SwanVsDalton]

What an embarrassment this tournament is turning out to be. Bit of a shame really, I was looking forward to an NI vs ROI game with some competitive bite and I don't think the idea behind the Nations Cup is necessarily a bad one. But it's organisation has been badly handled and it seems clear some associations are far more keen on it than others.

[DannyInvincible]

It would appear that those propogating that the boycott was because of player "nicking" haven't managed to get their message across to the media yet.

They're still spinning I see, and, to my surprise, without even a hint of embarrassment or subtlety:


"The rest of us just need to spin this boycott to the issue of player poaching."

"Therefore, putting a spin on the boycott (as you suggest) and upping the ante, with regards to manifesting our disgust at the IFA's passive attitude towards FAI poaching, should now be at the forefront of Amalgamation activities."

What do these fans think their fabricated boycott can achieve? What exactly is it that they're expecting the IFA to do about the player eligibility issue? I get the impression half are ignorant to the rules they're apparently protesting against whilst confusion also reigns as to what change exactly they should be demanding; proposed solutions have been aired from - without, it would seem, any hint of self-awareness - FIFA limiting players to playing only for the body governing the territory in which the individual was born to having the FAI voluntarily sign up to an agreement on selection with the IFA because they ought to feel ashamed of their "pro-apartheid, sectarian selection policy".

More than anything, they're surely just hurting their own association in the pocket. Have they already forgotten about CAS? It's not as if the IFA haven't already embarked on a foolhardy and futile attempt to subvert FIFA's interpretation of their own rules and have them read in the IFA's favour. Not only did that end fruitless but it left the IFA also having to foot the cost of legal fees for Daniel Kearns, the FAI and FIFA.

The chances of FIFA amending their rules are extremely slim to nil for a number of reasons, including: the IFA are a small and relatively unimportant association in the grand scheme of things (as are the FAI, for what it's worth, but inaction inevitably favours the FAI); the trend, as supported and lobbied for by the Francophone north African bloc of associations, seems to be flowing in the direction opposite to that which the IFA would prefer; and, beyond the internal politics and practicalities, the moral question of whether it would be acceptable to deny an Irishman the right to represent his country as well as the surrounding furore such might evoke if FIFA were to limit this right is probably something the organisation would prefer to stay well clear of and leave be if at all possible. I'd find it hard to envisage the formulation of a persuasive argument in favour of limitation besides.

Apart from the fact that it would make the potential of some agreement between the two associations a practical impossibility, cutting off all ties with the FAI (whatever that might involve exactly; deleting John Delaney, Don Givens and Marco Tardelli from Facebook, et cetera?), as I've seen suggested, wouldn't evoke any sympathy for the IFA's cause either, but then, the likelihood of the FAI voluntarily agreeing to unilaterally disadvantage their position when they're doing nothing in breach of the rules is somewhat unlikely anyway. All avenues appear pretty much doomed with the IFA in a no-win situation no matter what they do. Considering this, it all just seems like an effort to stir as much of a fuss as possible, but nothing with any real hope, direction or persuasion; anything but acknowledge that the IFA can't really do a huge deal or that the idea of Irish nationals playing for Ireland might actually make perfect sense.

[ArdeeBhoy]

What an embarrassment this tournament is turning out to be. Bit of a shame really

No, it was a shame this pathetic competition was ever proposed. Nothing against the Scots and Welsh fans and players mind.
Just the Irish, from all over the island!

[Sullivinho]

What do these fans think their fabricated boycott can achieve? What exactly is it that they're expecting the IFA to do about the player eligibility issue?

I get the impression that from a Norn fan perspective (or at least among those who offer an opinion on the matter), FAI policy and the IFA's response to it are seen as the dominant factors in the player 'defection' issue. These players aren't autonomously and enthusiastically choosing to represent Ireland no, they're being 'poached'. Having their heads turned, lured away etc. And those sloppy guardians the IFA are just letting it happen. I've observed scant recognition of what I'd consider the true stimulus; the player's personal affinity and allegiance, or lack thereof. What effect is some boycott supposed to have on that? Taking their objections to their natural conclusions, is denial of identity and freedom of choice the objective and solution here?

It must be a difficult task to organise boycotts and whatnot with all those elephants in the room.

[BonnieShels]

No, it was a shame this pathetic competition was ever proposed. Nothing against the Scots and Welsh fans and players mind.
Just the Irish, from all over the island!

Yeah, the State of us and the statelet of them.

Has anyone ever talked about another factor about this tournament that all participants are pretty mediocre (and that's being kind)? I love the idea of it but the scheduling of it over to seperate chunks and holding it in only 1 city was daft not to mention the midweek environment. Still though, I'll be there next Tuesday.

[DannyInvincible]

Has anyone ever talked about another factor about this tournament that all participants are pretty mediocre (and that's being kind)? I love the idea of it but the scheduling of it over to seperate chunks and holding it in only 1 city was daft not to mention the midweek environment. Still though, I'll be there next Tuesday.

I imagine this is why the organisers would have liked to have had England on board at the beginning, and possibly why England had no subsequent interest in taking part. Whatever about the quality of the sides participating, however, the scheduling has indeed been pretty poor. Was a friendly game between NI-Wales or Scotland-Wales in Dublin ever going to draw a significant crowd?